A few tips from me on losing weight

[Tolley]

Fitne tea relies a lot on LAXATIVES. Getting dependent on laxatives is very unhealthy. What it means is your system can't process food normally any more and you need higher and higher does of laxatives not to be constipated. If you go off the laxatives, your system won't be used to normal function. In other words: DAMAGE.

Personally, I would strongly caution anyone from going into any kind of long term use of laxatives for weight loss. Save the laxatives for the times when you really need them for an acute problem of constipation.

Yes it is true that Fitne Tea is popular with Thai people but they mostly use it for SHORT TERM weight loss (and just because it's popular doesn't make it something that would good for YOUR health). Skin whiteners are also popular with Thai people. ('Nuff said?)

Far better off using a good probiotic if you want more efficient digestion which in turn will help with weight loss.

Those laxatives are probably going to leave you dehydrated and undernourished .

[ding]

Agree with OP 100%.

Lift heavy, restrict calories, eat whole foods within your macros.

Track calories & macros at sparkpeople.com for example. Design your Macros and lifting program at bodybuilding.com.

Me;

carbs 160g, fat 80g, protein 180g,

Lift heavy - go to bodybuilding.com to get a program. Get a trainer to start if you can afford it - must know how to lift heavy. (not crossfit, aearobics, etc)

Save your joints and long painful delays, do it right from the start. Use light weights to get form correct.

Go to youtube and search 'how to' vids on your exercises. ie; "How to Romanian Deadlift" or "How to RDL".

I like to watch pro bodybuilders do the moves before I head to the gym for a better pump.

If I keep going everyday, I WANT to go to the gym.

But... If I stop, I can barley drag my butt back in.

Edited October 13, 2013 by ding

[ding]

Indeed visceral fat is where you say it is, and is the dangerous fat that is linked with all kinds of health problems. It is necessary to reduce it by diet and exercise best done in tandem. It comes along with a spare tyre, or did with me anyway.

The op mentioned :"don't do cardio, do weight lifting" , Robblok suggested a variety of exercises that were more efficient than cardio for moving stubborn fat. I suggested you at least do some exercise.

I have found that eliminating all whole grains and some other carbs such as rice has reduced my visceral fat considerably, and was passing along that info. Much quicker results than a couple of years of steady cardio workouts week in week out. This is not a diet, per se but a lifestyle alteration in diet.

Also of course high intensity workouts move stuff along even better. Along these lines perhaps:

http://BBC Two - Horizon, 2011-2012, The Truth About Exercise http://www.bbc.co.uk

Other studies indicate sprinting for about 10 seconds with a couple minutes rest in between 6-8 sprints total increases HGH (human growth hormone) naturally. It increases it by a LOT it would seem.

So, I do 6 sets of 10 second windsprints. Lift heavy. Make a noise come out of my wife. Rinse-repeat.

[Bikkii]

This Herbal tea works for me. I have tried many products in my life. I mean many.

This Fitne Tea will empty your stomach. Comes in many types and packs even in coffee. tea works best for me.

(I'm not trying to sell it or anything, just giving my option helping a fellow out)

Try it, eat healthy, exercise and check your weight on the scale"It will do" alt=thumbsup.gif width=25 height=19> "Lose wight is not the real issue, keeping that long desired weight is the real problem"

Fitne tea relies a lot on LAXATIVES. Getting dependent on laxatives is very unhealthy. What it means is your system can't process food normally any more and you need higher and higher does of laxatives not to be constipated. If you go off the laxatives, your system won't be used to normal function. In other words: DAMAGE.

Personally, I would strongly caution anyone from going into any kind of long term use of laxatives for weight loss. Save the laxatives for the times when you really need them for an acute problem of constipation.

Yes it is true that Fitne Tea is popular with Thai people but they mostly use it for SHORT TERM weight loss (and just because it's popular doesn't make it something that would good for YOUR health). Skin whiteners are also popular with Thai people. ('Nuff said?)

An even better alternative to this tea for overall health is Oolong Tea. To be effective it must be loose leaf and come from the fujian province in China. Hard to find here but it is stocked.

I lost a hell of a lot of weight drinking 8-10 cups a day, preferably before and with food. It stops fat absorbtion, great for the heart, cholesterol and many others. Whats more it is not a laxative, just a natural product. Well worth it.

[MrHammer]

Go to youtube and search 'how to' vids on your exercises. ie; "How to Romanian Deadlift" or "How to RDL".

I like to watch pro bodybuilders do the moves before I head to the gym for a better pump.

I'd like to retract recommending heavy deadlifts to people up in age and with no experience in lifting.

I haven't deadlifted for a couple of months now because I had frequent bad lower back pain. Got an MRI and I have a degenerate disc, which is basically the beginning of a bulging disc. Which isn't cool when you're 31 and love to deadlift. I have lifted heavier than most though (personal best 190 kg), which is probably a mistake. Since not deadlifting anymore, I do not have this back pain. So I've had to give up deadlifts and that sucks, though of course, I can not be totally sure it was the deadlifts and not something else.

So do the deadlifts, but do them very light.

[ding]

Go to youtube and search 'how to' vids on your exercises. ie; "How to Romanian Deadlift" or "How to RDL".

I like to watch pro bodybuilders do the moves before I head to the gym for a better pump.

I'd like to retract recommending heavy deadlifts to people up in age and with no experience in lifting.

I haven't deadlifted for a couple of months now because I had frequent bad lower back pain. Got an MRI and I have a degenerate disc, which is basically the beginning of a bulging disc. Which isn't cool when you're 31 and love to deadlift. I have lifted heavier than most though (personal best 190 kg), which is probably a mistake. Since not deadlifting anymore, I do not have this back pain. So I've had to give up deadlifts and that sucks, though of course, I can not be totally sure it was the deadlifts and not something else.

So do the deadlifts, but do them very light.

Agree again. I stopped D/L's due to low back pain. I squat in a shoulder-pad squat rack by Precor. Also incline & decline leg presses along with flat leg press. I even use heavy dumbells to shrug - hands in neutral position at sides, not supinated while using a barbell (palms up, or out). I'm an 'old joints' guy. Used to race MX - so have some issues...

I still get under the bar 1x week, but dumbbells afford a more natural angle. My rotator cuffs and elbows like that and I can go deeper into the negative. I have to hammer curl VERY light.

Supinated curls are fine. A Thai Dr said I have 'golfer's elbow'. But now it's in both. Arthritis maybe, I dunno?

419 pounds is definitely big boy style. Grats brother.

Edited October 27, 2013 by ding

[robblok]

Go to youtube and search 'how to' vids on your exercises. ie; "How to Romanian Deadlift" or "How to RDL".

I like to watch pro bodybuilders do the moves before I head to the gym for a better pump.

I'd like to retract recommending heavy deadlifts to people up in age and with no experience in lifting.

I haven't deadlifted for a couple of months now because I had frequent bad lower back pain. Got an MRI and I have a degenerate disc, which is basically the beginning of a bulging disc. Which isn't cool when you're 31 and love to deadlift. I have lifted heavier than most though (personal best 190 kg), which is probably a mistake. Since not deadlifting anymore, I do not have this back pain. So I've had to give up deadlifts and that sucks, though of course, I can not be totally sure it was the deadlifts and not something else.

So do the deadlifts, but do them very light.

I have deadlifted around that weight 5 reps of 185 kg. Never a problem but I don't go for heavy singles. I am actually still going strong without any injuries. I have almost never had any injuries. Only reason I don't deadlift too much as it is not my favorite exercise. It is an easy exercise to get strong on. I do my squats / bench presses. I even got a hex bar for deadlifts (the 5 x 185 kg was done with normal bar) Hex bar makes it easier on the back.

I think things differ for different people but if i had to stop working out hard id get bored. I need to work hard and intense (not necessarily heavy) to keep it interesting.

One thing I have learned is a good warm-up that prevents a lot of crap.

[JSixpack]

Agree with OP 100%.

I don't.

Lift heavy, restrict calories, eat whole foods within your macros.

Track calories & macros at sparkpeople.com for example.

No.

Me;

carbs 160g, fat 80g, protein 180g,

Too many carbs, pal. No wonder you're a calorie counter.

Here's something recent, fairly simple, you calories in/out religionists can read, see (pix!), and likely comprehend. Will need to be read at least 10 times. It's also from the UK, so it's TRUE and kosher. Commonwealth suckups can therefore find it credible too.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2459915/Could-low-fat-diet-make-EVEN-FATTER-As-experts-question-conventional-wisdom-diets-extraordinary-results-mans-experiment.html

Related recent article (UK medical journal):

http://www.bmj.com/content/347/bmj.f6340

[singa-traz]

Agree with OP 100%.

I don't.

Lift heavy, restrict calories, eat whole foods within your macros.

Track calories & macros at sparkpeople.com for example.

No.

Me;

carbs 160g, fat 80g, protein 180g,

Too many carbs, pal. No wonder you're a calorie counter.

Here's something recent, fairly simple, you calories in/out religionists can read, see (pix!), and likely comprehend. Will need to be read at least 10 times. It's also from the UK, so it's TRUE and kosher. Commonwealth suckups can therefore find it credible too.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2459915/Could-low-fat-diet-make-EVEN-FATTER-As-experts-question-conventional-wisdom-diets-extraordinary-results-mans-experiment.html

Related recent article (UK medical journal):

http://www.bmj.com/content/347/bmj.f6340

A one man experiment ... "Science" at his best.

Got a few friends on the low carb diet, who dropped 10-15 kg in a short time ... can't wait to see them again in 2014.

[JSixpack]

A one man experiment ... "Science" at his best.

Got a few friends on the low carb diet, who dropped 10-15 kg in a short time ... can't wait to see them again in 2014.

And OP's experiment was definitely science at its best, so it was echoed and blessed throughout this thread.

Read the article:

The sceptics believe that the idea of all calories being equal is flawed.

Indeed, Professor David Lawrence, an expert in nutrition and obesity data analysis, said recently in the journal BMC Medicine that the idea is based 'on an outdated understanding of the science'.

And wasn't the other article from a med journal science? And where's your refutation?

And where was your "science?" All you have is a sneer and a childish speculation. That is, the usual know-nothing hot air.

I've given scientific references here before, even references to standard biochemistry textbooks. They won't be read or paid any attention whatsoever. I no longer bother: carbs in/out, all calories equal is a religion here. But if you want some references, you can PM me.

Anecdotes are the coins of this lowly realm.

BTW, on the futility of exercise and weight loss, you'll need to read this 10 times:

http://nymag.com/news/sports/38001/

Edited October 28, 2013 by JSixpack

[singa-traz]

I must admit, I'm outguned by a comprehensive references list and an impressive collection of magazine links.

The fact is, I'm really new to the nutrition debate/domain, but having worked in Sales and Marketing for many years ... I learned to be cautious of what is presented to me. When it's too good to be true ...

So, I will continue to educate myself and plan to take this course online: https://www.coursera.org/course/nutritionforhealth

Both instructors have Ph.D. So, do we have a tie?

But maybe they are both religious extremists, and so, how can we trust them ...

[Jingthing]

Oy vey. It is KNOWN SCIENCE that food intake is much more important for potential weight loss than exercise. It is ALSO known that the SIMPLISTIC calories in - calories out orthodoxy is a sadly OUTDATED belief system. That said, there is no doubt that moderate exercise does promote overall good health (not the same thing as weight loss) and also of course for any hope of weight loss you'll need some level of calorie restriction (though it DOES matter what's in those calories). Also, no exercise also promotes poor health. It's true many obese people don't move much but a big reason for that is because they are ... obese.

Another way to look at this is that there is health and there is overweight and obesity and there is not a DIRECT relationship between the two. I reckon that statement will make some orthodox people SCREAM. Sorry, but the simple minded models just don't wash. For example an overweight (not obese) person who does moderate exercise and eats nutritious meals is very likely a more healthy person than the normal weight person who doesn't move and eats junk food.

Edited October 28, 2013 by Jingthing

[robblok]

Oy vey. It is KNOWN SCIENCE that food intake is much more important for potential weight loss than exercise. It is ALSO known that the SIMPLISTIC calories in - calories out orthodoxy is a sadly OUTDATED belief system. That said, there is no doubt that moderate exercise does promote overall good health (not the same thing as weight loss) and also of course for any hope of weight loss you'll need some level of calorie restriction (though it DOES matter what's in those calories). Also, no exercise also promotes poor health. It's true many obese people don't move much but a big reason for that is because they are ... obese.

Another way to look at this is that there is health and there is overweight and obesity and there is not a DIRECT relationship between the two. I reckon that statement will make some orthodox people SCREAM. Sorry, but the simple minded models just don't wash. For example an overweight (not obese) person who does moderate exercise and eats nutritious meals is very likely a more healthy person than the normal weight person who doesn't move and eats junk food.

Yes there has been a lot of data that shows a combination of caloric restriction and exercise works best. I believe it was because you then maintain your muscles because if you don't you might loose muscle mass and by loosing that you get a lover caloric burn.

Even if not true like you said exercise is good for you though at times its hard to start.

[JSixpack]

So, I will continue to educate myself and plan to take this course online: https://www.coursera.org/course/nutritionforhealth

Both instructors have Ph.D. So, do we have a tie?

But maybe they are both religious extremists, and so, how can we trust them ...

Just looking at topics on the page, what exactly do you see that is necessarily inconsistent w/ the articles I referenced?

Of course they will present starvation as one of the weight loss strategies. And it's quite true: there were no obese survivors of Auschwitz. Hence here in the forum you'll always get some extreme examples purporting to prove the rule beyond ALL doubt. "Run 30 miles a day or eat nothing for 2 weeks and I guarantee you'll lose weight!" Or, "Eat 20,000 calories a day from fat and I guarantee you'll gain weight!"

I love this forum!

Such extreme hypothetical examples aren't helpful for determining reliable, realistic, sustainable (relatively natural and easy), healthy ways of maintaining ideal body weight or for understanding what's really behind weight gain in the average case. Of course each metabolism is a bit different.

Indeed, one of the references (http://andevidencelibrary.com/files/Docs/WM%20Position%20Paper.pdf), from 2009, given for reading in your course supports my original post! (However, it doesn't (at least in this section) go far enough to address the low-glycemic benefit).

Frequently, individuals reduce the

carbohydrate content of their diet as a

weight loss strategy. As glycogen

stores are depleted in response to low-

carbohydrate intake, the resultant di-

uresis produces an initial dramatic

weight loss. On very-low-carbohy-

drate diets (eg, 20 g/day) the body

produces ketones to sustain fuel uti-

lization in the brain, which may in

turn help with diet adherence by de-

creasing hunger (36). Individuals as-

signed to the ad libitum low-carbohy-

drate diet in recent randomized

controlled trials lost more weight at 6

months than individuals assigned to

the low-fat, reduced-energy diet, but

this difference was no longer signifi-

cant at 12 months (11,37,38). Con-

cerns regarding an increase in cardio-

vascular risks with low-carbohydrate

diets do not appear to be as problem-

atic as first thought (37).

[tropo]

So, I will continue to educate myself and plan to take this course online: https://www.coursera.org/course/nutritionforhealth

Both instructors have Ph.D. So, do we have a tie?

But maybe they are both religious extremists, and so, how can we trust them ...

Just looking at topics on the page, what exactly do you see that is necessarily inconsistent w/ the articles I referenced?

Of course they will present starvation as one of the weight loss strategies. And it's quite true: there were no obese survivors of Auschwitz. Hence here in the forum you'll always get some extreme examples purporting to prove the rule beyond ALL doubt. "Run 30 miles a day or eat nothing for 2 weeks and I guarantee you'll lose weight!" Or, "Eat 20,000 calories a day from fat and I guarantee you'll gain weight!"

I love this forum!

Such extreme hypothetical examples aren't helpful for determining reliable, realistic, sustainable (relatively natural and easy), healthy ways of maintaining ideal body weight or for understanding what's really behind weight gain in the average case. Of course each metabolism is a bit different.

Indeed, one of the references (http://andevidencelibrary.com/files/Docs/WM%20Position%20Paper.pdf), from 2009, given for reading in your course supports my original post! (However, it doesn't (at least in this section) go far enough to address the low-glycemic benefit).

Frequently, individuals reduce the

carbohydrate content of their diet as a

weight loss strategy. As glycogen

stores are depleted in response to low-

carbohydrate intake, the resultant di-

uresis produces an initial dramatic

weight loss. On very-low-carbohy-

drate diets (eg, 20 g/day) the body

produces ketones to sustain fuel uti-

lization in the brain, which may in

turn help with diet adherence by de-

creasing hunger (36). Individuals as-

signed to the ad libitum low-carbohy-

drate diet in recent randomized

controlled trials lost more weight at 6

months than individuals assigned to

the low-fat, reduced-energy diet, but

this difference was no longer signifi-

cant at 12 months (11,37,38). Con-

cerns regarding an increase in cardio-

vascular risks with low-carbohydrate

diets do not appear to be as problem-

atic as first thought (37).

There's one major problem with these studies. They rely on the people in the study reporting what they consumed. They did not conduct this study in a lab for 6 months.

As you know, certain foods can satisfy the appetite more than others, so lowered appetites are more likely responsible for these results than quantity of calories consumed.

You like to search for links, so how about providing a link to a study where people were kept in a lab for months and everything they ate was controlled and every calorie expended through exercise was calculated. 6 months would be nice because it can take awhile to see significant changes. Also, they would need to be measured for bodyfat and muscle mass at regular intervals - by a 4 compartment fat testing method for maximum accuracy.

There would need to be a number of groups in this experiment, each of them eating different proportions of macro-nutrients. Some groups exercising and some groups not would be a bonus too - to see how exercise benefited fat loss.

I don't believe such an experiment has ever been done. If it has been done, I'd love to read about it.

[Bikkii]

A friend of mine went from 106kg to 76kg in 10 weeks last year.

He did this while on holiday in Thailand.

That's 40 kg

That's 4 kg a week every week

That's possible?

EDIT ...

As hano points out overpage ... it's actually 30 kilos ...

So that's 3 kg a week

.

Sounds to me like he was getting a lot more sex than usual and smoking that damm white stuff. Then sure, 3kg a week not a proclem.

[singa-traz]

It is the position of the American Dietetic Association that successful weight management to improve overall health for adults requires a lifelong commitment to healthful lifestyle behaviors emphasizing sustainable and enjoyable eating practices and daily physical activity.

I do enjoy eating "my carb" as well as having regular physical activity, a combination that help me create/increase the calorie deficit, and also build a sustainable healtly lifestyle.

My "religious" view, is that sticking to a low carb diet can't be a long term strategy. It's a short term strategy, with quick reward (rapid loss of weight), while you have not yet changed your unhealthy behaviors. A recipe for future disaster.

And you forgot this portion of the report:

EAL Recommendation “Having patients focus on reducing carbohydrates rather than reducing calories and/or fat may be a short-term strategy for some individuals. Research indicates that focusing on reducing carbohydrate intake (<35% of kcal from carbohydrates) results in reduced energy intake. Consumption of a low- carbohydrate diet is associated with a greater weight and fat loss than traditional reduced-calorie diets during the first 6 months, but these differences are not significant after 1 year” (Rating: Fair, Conditional) (11).

The EAL also notes that safety has not been evaluated for long-term, extreme restrictions of carbohydrates (<35% of energy from carbohydrates) and specifically recommends that practitioners use caution in suggest-ing a low-carbohydrate diet for even short-term use in patients with osteo- porosis, kidney disease, or in patients with increased low-density lipopro- tein cholesterol (11).

And Professor David Lawrence ... is a statistician.

http://www.childhealthresearch.org.au/our-people/staff-student-index/l/david-lawrence.aspx

[tropo]

It is the position of the American Dietetic Association that successful weight management to improve overall health for adults requires a lifelong commitment to healthful lifestyle behaviors emphasizing sustainable and enjoyable eating practices and daily physical activity.

I do enjoy eating "my carb" as well as having regular physical activity, a combination that help me create/increase the calorie deficit, and also build a sustainable healtly lifestyle.

My "religious" view, is that sticking to a low carb diet can't be a long term strategy. It's a short term strategy, with quick reward (rapid loss of weight), while you have not yet changed your unhealthy behaviors. A recipe for future disaster.

pasta2.jpg

And you forgot this portion of the report:

EAL Recommendation “Having patients focus on reducing carbohydrates rather than reducing calories and/or fat may be a short-term strategy for some individuals. Research indicates that focusing on reducing carbohydrate intake (<35% of kcal from carbohydrates) results in reduced energy intake. Consumption of a low- carbohydrate diet is associated with a greater weight and fat loss than traditional reduced-calorie diets during the first 6 months, but these differences are not significant after 1 year” (Rating: Fair, Conditional) (11).

The EAL also notes that safety has not been evaluated for long-term, extreme restrictions of carbohydrates (<35% of energy from carbohydrates) and specifically recommends that practitioners use caution in suggest-ing a low-carbohydrate diet for even short-term use in patients with osteo- porosis, kidney disease, or in patients with increased low-density lipopro- tein cholesterol (11).

And Professor David Lawrence ... is a statistician.

http://www.childhealthresearch.org.au/our-people/staff-student-index/l/david-lawrence.aspx

Some of you are taking the idea of low carbing too far.

One would think that as soon as you go low carb it's instant weight loss and that how much you eat is of absolutely no consequence whatsoever... that any calories from any non-carb source will magically disappear.

Sorry, I'm not buying it. At the end of the day it's calories-in vs calories-out. You can't cancel out the laws of physics. It's easy to get fat eating fat because it's so calorie dense.

[Tolley]

I dont really subscribe to the low carb diet long term either as I have seen a lot of people try it and then revert back to their old ways and of course get fatter than what they were to start with. Sure they had impressive short term results but they went too radical and couldnt sustain it.

A more practical approach is I believe in eating good quality carbs like brown rice, and oats and completely getting rid of all those other processed carbs from the diet including bread. Both of these foods have great nutritional qualities and provide carbs that the body will crave for if you starve yourself of catbs.

On the other point of exercise not being as important as diet well I agree but still when I look at all the guys I know who exercise regularly then they are all in good shape and that is regardless of diet as I see them eating all sort of junk. So it does make you wonder sometimes. I wouldnt under rate exercise especially heavy exercise. Maybe because you have less time to eat and also you are more active doing other things as a result of the exercise?

Edited October 29, 2013 by Tolley

[Tolley]

It is the position of the American Dietetic Association that successful weight management to improve overall health for adults requires a lifelong commit[/size]ment to healthful lifestyle behaviors emphasizing sustainable and enjoyable eating practices and daily physical activity. [/size]

I do enjoy eating "my carb" as well as having regular physical activity, a combination that help me create/increase the calorie deficit, and also build a sustainable healtly lifestyle.

My "religious" view, is that sticking to a low carb diet can't be a long term strategy. It's a short term strategy, with quick reward (rapid loss of weight), while you have not yet changed your unhealthy behaviors. A recipe for future disaster.

pasta2.jpg

And you forgot this portion of the report:

EAL Recommendation [/size]Having patients focus on reducing carbohydrates rather than reducing calories and/or fat may be a short-term strategy for some individuals. Research indicates that focusing on reducing carbohydrate intake ([/size]<35% of kcal from carbohydrates) results in reduced energy intake. Consumption of a low- carbohydrate diet is associated with a greater weight and fat loss than traditional reduced-calorie diets during the first 6 months, but these differences are not significant after 1 year ([/size]Rating: Fair, Conditional[/size]) ([/size]11[/size]).[/size]

The EAL also notes that safety has not been evaluated for long-term, extreme restrictions of carbohydrates ([/size]<35% of energy from carbohydrates) and specifically recommends that practitioners use caution in suggest-ing a low-carbohydrate diet for even short-term use in patients with osteo- porosis, kidney disease, or in patients with increased low-density lipopro- tein cholesterol ([/size]11[/size]). [/size]

And Professor David Lawrence ... is a statistician.

http://www.childhealthresearch.org.au/our-people/staff-student-index/l/david-lawrence.aspx

Some of you are taking the idea of low carbing too far.

One would think that as soon as you go low carb it's instant weight loss and that how much you eat is of absolutely no consequence whatsoever... that any calories from any non-carb source will magically disappear.

Sorry, I'm not buying it. At the end of the day it's calories-in vs calories-out. You can't cancel out the laws of physics. It's easy to get fat eating fat because it's so calorie dense.

I think you are half right.

Yes they are taking the carbs thing too far.

But the whole calories in calories out is way too simplistic sorry I dont buy it too much evidence that says otherwise.

[singa-traz]

Video on Obesity, which includes topics that have been discussed in this tread:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XpyuslOwZSA

Link to the study mentioned:

"Comparison of Weight-Loss Diets with Different Compositions of Fat, Protein, and Carbohydrates"

http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa0804748

[tropo]

I think you are half right.

Yes they are taking the carbs thing too far.

But the whole calories in calories out is way too simplistic sorry I dont buy it too much evidence that says otherwise.

It's not simplistic, it's the laws of physics... and you're never going to disprove that right now as we've yet to have humans living for months on end in a lab. The cost of these experiments would be prohibitive.

In the meanwhile we can argue back and forth. I'll go with the laws of physics over anecdotal evidence until you can prove the laws of physics don't apply.

[tropo]

Video on Obesity, which includes topics that have been discussed in this tread:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XpyuslOwZSA

Link to the study mentioned:

"Comparison of Weight-Loss Diets with Different Compositions of Fat, Protein, and Carbohydrates"

http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa0804748

This study didn't include a low carb diet.

This study is positive proof that these type of studies are meaningless as far as the 'calories-in vs calories-out' debate is concerned. They relied on 800 participants eating a planned diet for 2 years and that they adhered diligently to this diet for the entire period. Give me a break - what a waste of time and money. To top it off, they didn't measure bodyfat at all - just weight on the scale.

The most telling part of this study was the introduction. It's so good it deserves to be pasted here:

There is intense debate about what types of diet are most effective for treating overweight — those that emphasize protein, those that emphasize carbohydrates, or those that emphasize fat.1-3 Several trials showed that low-carbohydrate, high-protein diets resulted in more weight loss over the course of 3 to 6 months than conventional high-carbohydrate, low-fat diets,4-12 but other studies did not show this effect.13-17 A smaller group of studies that extended the follow-up to 1 year did not show that low-carbohydrate, high-protein diets were superior to high-carbohydrate, low-fat diets.6,10,16,18-21 In contrast, other researchers found that a very-high-carbohydrate, very-low-fat vegetarian diet was superior to a conventional high-carbohydrate, low-fat diet.22-24 Among the few studies that extended beyond 1 year, one showed that a very-low-fat vegetarian diet was superior to a conventional low-fat diet,24one showed that a low-fat diet was superior to a moderate-fat diet,25 two showed that a moderate-fat, Mediterranean-style diet was superior to a low-fat diet,12,26 one showed that a low-carbohydrate diet was superior to a low-fat diet,12 and another showed no difference between high-protein and low-protein diets.10 Small samples, underrepresentation of men, limited generalizability, a lack of blinded ascertainment of the outcome, a lack of data on adherence to assigned diets, and a large loss to follow-up limit the interpretation of many weight-loss trials.27 The novelty of the diet, media attention, and the enthusiasm of the researchers could affect the adherence of participants to any type of diet. The crucial question is whether overweight people have a better response in the long term to diets that emphasize a specific macronutrient composition. Thus, we recognized the need for a large trial that would be designed to overcome the limitations of previous trials and that would compare the effects of three principal dietary macronutrients. We studied weight change over the course of 2 years, since weight loss typically is greatest 6 to 12 months after initiation of the diet, with steady regain of weight subsequently.28

[Jingthing]

Other stuff is going on that simple math can't address.

Some but not all including:

Stomach bacteria. Leptin levels (your personal tolerance for it and also the leptin in specific foods). Foods that speed up metabolism. High sugar foods and starches that impact insulin. Yes level of vegetarianism may be a factor related to stomach bacteria but likely not important unless you are a full on vegetarian. Yes having more muscle promotes fat burning vs. less muscle. POSSIBLY impact of certain supplements on food processing meaning the same calories in without the supplements may be a different number WITH the supplements. As far as a "golden formula" diet that is going to be optimal for all, it DOES NOT EXIST. That's HOLY GRAIL stuff.

It doesn't have to be one or the other, orthodoxy about calorie in and out vs. rejection of it.

OF COURSE, calorie in calorie out is an important FACTOR but it is not the entire picture. There are just too many variables.

Bottom line, IF you're going to be a healthy person and for most people that ultimately is going to reflect in a healthy body size (though not necessarily insurance charts "normal" weight), attention must be paid both to food intake (what foods and portions) AND to physical activity. Knowing exactly what to do for you, it just ain't that easy.

In my opinion, however, eating more fresh fruits and vegetables and cutting down on processed foods as much as possible is a no brainer. There is always going to controversy over details.

Edited October 29, 2013 by Jingthing

[Thai at Heart]

Fitne tea relies a lot on LAXATIVES. Getting dependent on laxatives is very unhealthy. What it means is your system can't process food normally any more and you need higher and higher does of laxatives not to be constipated. If you go off the laxatives, your system won't be used to normal function. In other words: DAMAGE.

Personally, I would strongly caution anyone from going into any kind of long term use of laxatives for weight loss. Save the laxatives for the times when you really need them for an acute problem of constipation.

Yes it is true that Fitne Tea is popular with Thai people but they mostly use it for SHORT TERM weight loss (and just because it's popular doesn't make it something that would good for YOUR health). Skin whiteners are also popular with Thai people. ('Nuff said?)

Love how they write "herbal" on the front as though that makes it a good idea.

Weight loss tea. As though the business world wouldn't have grabbed fitne and be force feeding to the clinically obese?

[tropo]

Other stuff is going on that simple math can't address.

Some but not all including:

Stomach bacteria. Leptin levels (your personal tolerance for it and also the leptin in specific foods). Foods that speed up metabolism. High sugar foods and starches that impact insulin. Yes level of vegetarianism may be a factor related to stomach bacteria but likely not important unless you are a full on vegetarian. Yes having more muscle promotes fat burning vs. less muscle. POSSIBLY impact of certain supplements on food processing meaning the same calories in without the supplements may be a different number WITH the supplements. As far as a "golden formula" diet that is going to be optimal for all, it DOES NOT EXIST. That's HOLY GRAIL stuff.

It doesn't have to be one or the other, orthodoxy about calorie in and out vs. rejection of it.

OF COURSE, calorie in calorie out is an important FACTOR but it is not the entire picture. There are just too many variables.

Bottom line, IF you're going to be a healthy person and for most people that ultimately is going to reflect in a healthy body size (though not necessarily insurance charts "normal" weight), attention must be paid both to food intake (what foods and portions) AND to physical activity. Knowing exactly what to do for you, it just ain't that easy.

In my opinion, however, eating more fresh fruits and vegetables and cutting down on processed foods as much as possible is a no brainer. There is always going to controversy over details.

The fact that certain diets work better than others does not debunk the basic physics. Matter and energy do not magically disappear.

If you consume a calorie, only 3 things can happen.

1. It is used as energy.

2. It is stored

3. It is excreted.

I've never seen any research regarding calories excreted. Certainly diabetics will piss out sugar when the levels become too high, but how many calories do we excrete when we take a huge dump? Surely there must be some calories wasted. It would be a disgusting job to work it out though.,..

I know I can maintain a stable bodyweight no matter what percentage of carbs, protein or fat I eat. Last year I ate high protein, low carbs, now I'm eating high carbs and moderate protein. My bodyweight hasn't changed. If I want to lose weight I need to reduce total calories - it's that simple. Why make it more complicated that it really is?

Edited October 29, 2013 by tropo

[Jingthing]

Because it is.

Sent from my GT-S5360B using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[singa-traz]

Because it is.

Sent from my GT-S5360B using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Or is it because it's convenient to think so? Think about it.

[tropo]

Because it is.

Sent from my GT-S5360B using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

The comment was "why make it more complicated than it really is". How can something be more complicated than it is?

Edited October 29, 2013 by tropo

[tropo]

Because it is.

Sent from my GT-S5360B using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Or is it because it's convenient to think so? Think about it.

LOL. That's exactly what I was thinking, but you don't want to get JT started.